RE: Welcome to The Senate Floor - PLEASE READ (Rules and Regs)

Why are yall so afraid of swears? Everyone has heard them before.

This is a family board. If you want to use them, go elsewhere.

 

"If they are going to ban some, they should ban all."

The JC as a whole bans some words and lets in others because of the varying degrees of profanity.

The F-bomb is at one end of the spectrum, and damn is at the other end, with hell, being two words that aren't really bad and no one really uses "damn" on the boards to curse someone.

The 2-Bs, on the other hand, are right in the middle - not always bad to use because of some definitions, but the privalege to use to use them is abused by people who want to just post profanity. Basically, though I trust people to post about abortion, drug laws, sexual orientation, politics and religion, I think given a few inches with profanity, they'll take a ****ing mile.

 

I understand the intention behind the ruling. However, there has to be room for common sense. This being a family board has little to do with it if the English language is being used in the correct manner. As I have stated I know of professional academics teaching kids aged between 11 and 19 who say these words in the correct context and it is accepted. No complaints from parents, other teachers, management or the pupils/students. If it is acceptable in a place of learning surely it is acceptable in the Senate which is meant for serious debate?????

By all means ounish those who abuse it.

Bane, I'm afraid you are wrong about William the Conqueror. He was widely known as William the Bastard, Duke of Normandy before his victory against Harold II of England. This is historical fact. Ask any historian with a specialism or interest in this area.

Anglo-Saxon history is an interest of mine as I come from Hampshire which formed a large part of the ancient Saxon kingdom of Wessex.

 

I am not doubting he was known as such; I am simply saying that I have never heard him referred to as such in any academic setting. Granted, I've never taken a purely Anglo-Saxon history class, but when he comes up, he is William, William the Conqueror or of Normandy.

 

OK, maybe it's a cultural thing. I accept that around the world he his better known as "The Conqueor" or "Of Normandy" etc... However, I assure you the other term is used in an academic setting. We seem to have gone off at a tangent. This was merely an example of how the "B word" could be used in its correct context without being offensive or misused. That fact remains that in my opinion, there should be room for a common sense approach to this rule and that every case should be judged on its merits.

I seem to remember this place being set up for the more mature posters to discuss serious and/or sensible topics. However, I feel there is a creeping tendancy to revert to some kind of nannying that brings back the "Diaper" mentality that we were both against in the first place.

Sure, people will use the words in the wrong context. When this happens they should be warned, spanked, punished or whatever. Restricting the more mature posters isn't the way forward especially in a place were serious discussion on controversial issues is permitted!

A blanket ban is a step backward not forward in my opinion.

 

Why was there no problem with this when it was put into effect some 9 months ago? It's not a new thing.

 

Why was there no problem with this when it was put into effect some 9 months ago? It's not a new thing.

I can think of two reasons:

1) I wasn't here to object 9 months ago.

2) I wasn't considering starting a thread on Family History until recently, so I had no reason to use the term "bastard" on the boards.

As I stated, it is a valid genealogical term. My thread would be much more limited if we are not allowed to use the proper terminology. Yes, I know we could "talk around" the word, but that is both inconvenient as well as imprecise. The term illegitimate does not always apply (in the case of recognized bastard children, depending on the country and time period) and the terms "born out of wedlock" or "child of unwed parents" are extremely cumbersome.

I have held off starting my thread because of this issue. There is no point in my starting a discussion where we have to talk around proper terminology for fear of offending someone. If you find the term in a genealogy-related discussion, you are most likely going to use the non-offensive genealogical definition.

Kimball Kinnison

 

I don't think the two B-words really need to be contested. I mean, you can easily say "female dog" or "fatherless child" and so and so forth. As for the other cuss words, I really think that the context that they are used in should be considered. While this might be a "family forum", there IS an age limit, so we don't have to be all angellic and innocent all the time.

 

I think the JC has moved on from where it was 9 months ago and the fact that we are arguing the point proves it. With the introduction of forums such as The Senate and The Amphitheatre came a change in the JC ethos of allowing formally "taboo" subjects to be discussed and trusting the more mature posters to act and discuss said topics sensibly.

That's why there wasn't a problem with these rules nine months ago.

I'll stick by the rules for as long as they are administered but it doesn't stop me thinking that we are reverting back to where we once were rather than moving forward.

The term "Bitch" is used on primetime telly in the UK on programs such as East Enders which is considered "Family Entertainment" by the BBC. Even the other "B word" is used before 9 o'clock on occasion but is used in the correct way.

All I'm asking for is a bit of common sense rather than a blanket ban.

 

I do believe the official rule as set by NathanDahlin is, "Bitch is allowed occasionally as a verb".

That has been my understanding of it.

Also, would it be spam if I upped this thread?

 

I can't believe we're upping this topic constantly because someone wants to use two of the fifteen kazillion words in the English dictionary. Get over it people! Bane and Knight are just trying to keep things civil in here.

(Okay, so this thread is set to stay on top anyway, but...)

+=o RoboNerd o=+

 

You people are so pretentious.

 

*wants to say something but sees that it seems over with about the words, so won't utter a syllable*

 

"I feel there is a creeping tendancy to revert to some kind of nannying that brings back the "Diaper" mentality that we were both against in the first place."

Boom. That's it, there ya go, nail on the head, etc etc. I agree totally.

"there IS an age limit, so we don't have to be all angellic and innocent all the time."

That "you have to be over 13" clause in hte agreement apparently means nothing. Or at least that's what the fundies who run this place tell us so they have an excuse to ban "bad words".

 

I totally agree with Darth_Asabrush . There definitly has to be room for common sense. Like he said, if it is used in it's correct context then I feel it is okay to use. There are people out there that just curse and swear for the heck of it to use it to simply get attention to thier posts. Which is something I don't agree with. I don't think the words should be banned, I think the person who uses it incorrectly should be taught a lesson or talked to about it.

Depending on what the situation is and what the topic is, there are just some words that need to be used, in correct context to your argument your talking about. Darth_Asabrush has some very good points that he made. If your going to use the words out of context then you need to be talked to and taught a lesson of some kind. Banning the words will only make it difficult for those who need certain words to extend his explanation a litle further. It's all in how it is used and if the context is used correctly. It's all common sense I believe.

May The Force Be With You,
Obi-HaCoR

 

1. You don't need to refer to a female dog as a bitch because frankly, there is no conversation where that'd come up.

I think there was a "Puppy Mills" thread and also an "Animal abuse" thread, where this word could have conceivably be used.

 

KNIGHTWRITER:

Hi. I am a (hopefully uncontentious) particpant in the recently "locked" evolution thread. I have a couple of questions:

1) What does it mean that the thread is "locked."

2) If it is permanently closed down, may I begin a related thread? Thank you.


Phantomwaver

 

Thank you for asking .

A locked thread means that the discussion in that thread is over with. Unless the moderator (me, in this case) allows for a related or continued discussion elsewhere, the thread and discussion is finished. You can't start a related thread without permission, and in this case I don't want to see another evolution-related thread for some time (for a variety of reasons).

Hope that answers your question .

 

I found it interesting that there is no discussion of SW allowed in this forum. It is good to have a breather, I suppose....

 

I found it interesting that there is no discussion of SW allowed in this forum.

well you have the Star Wars films boards where you can debate about star wars 24/7

 

What about censored words? Like "Bull****"? are they ok?

E_S

 

Not really, no. In that case, it would be much appreciated if "B.S." was used in its place. It's a prime example of moderator discretion, and for me, I'll take completely starred out words, but nothing more than that.

 

Hate to nitpick, but what about first-letter then starring? Example:

That totally p***** me off!

Where as, if I'm getting you correctly, you'd prefer:

That totally ****** me off!

Is the former ok, or the latter is the law?

E_S

 

Actually, interesting point. For clarity's sake, the first letter sometimes helps.

 

I hate to admit this, but I was watching Friends on the TV last night, while online. The phrases "Dumb Bitch" and "Stupid Bastard" were used at least 3 time each during the show. Now if I or any child can turn on prime-time TV (NBC's Must See TV! 8:00pm), and here these words spoken in this context, I don't see why they can't be used on these boards. That's my 2 cents.